Performance Management of Academic Managers Policy and Procedures
Approving authority / Executive GroupApproval date / 16 September 2014
Advisor / For advice on this policy, contact your HR Business Partner
Next scheduled review / 2018
Document URL / http://policies.griffith.edu.au/pdf/Performance Management of Academic Managers.pdf
TRIM document / 2016/0000116
Description / This document provides a summary of the policy and procedures for performance management of Academic Managers.
Related documents
Academic Staff Career Development Framework
Academic Staff Career Development Procedures
Academic Staff Career Development Plan
Academic Staff Review and Plan
Deputy Vice Chancellors
Griffith University Academic Staff Enterprise Agreement 2012-2016
Probation Policy for General Staff - Continuing and Fixed Term Appointments
Probation Procedures for General Staff - Continuing and Fixed Term Appointments
[Introduction] [Scope] [Application] [Delegated Authorities]
1. INTRODUCTION
This outlines the policy and procedures for performance management of Academic Managers.
Griffith University is committed to enhancing an individual's contribution to the University's goals and to ensure opportunities for personal recognition and job satisfaction.
The performance management process for Academic Managers exists to ensure that there is a channel through which equitable and fair performance judgements can be made about the performance of an Academic Manager, in relation to the management and academic functions of their job. The University recognises the benefits of career development for staff and acknowledges the benefits of Academic Managers and their Supervisor jointly planning for career development.
2. SCOPE
This policy applies to all Academic Managers. Academic Managers are: Deans, Academic Directors, Heads of School/Department, Research Centre Directors, and Dean (Learning Futures).
This performance management process is separate from the process of review for confirmation or promotion. This process can be used as a source of information for the promotion and confirmation process.
3. APPLICATION
3.1 Definitions
Academic manager performance is reviewed through submission of an Academic Manager's Review and Plan (AMRP). Academic management performance is broadly divided into four components. These are performance in:
§ the inherent management accountabilities of the position;
§ meeting the usual academic position requirements, as defined in the applicable position description for the job[1];
§ delivering key results as detailed in the individual performance objectives;
§ achieving their development objectives.
3.2 Process Overview
3.3 Academic Manager's Preparation and Submission of the Academic Manager's Review and Plan
In preparation for review, academic managers prepare an AMRP, Part 1 which is a self-appraisal on their performance in the preceding twelve months and an initial draft of Part 3, which is an outline of their proposed specific objectives for performance and development for the next twelve months. Objectives will be based upon individual objectives and actions for their current position. Submission of this report to the relevant supervisor is required by the end of October of each year and is the primary source of performance evidence in the evaluation.
In considering the objectives for the upcoming twelve months, the Academic Manager should consider the Group and University focused goals and outcomes, which may include equity issues, change management objectives and budget issues as well as staff and operation management accountabilities, and teaching, research and service goals. The expectations of academic versus managerial work and the balance between the two is also to be considered.
3.4 Performance Review
A formal review of performance will be conducted by the supervisor. This review will be evidence based and will take account of performance in meeting regular ongoing accountabilities and key results. The basis for this review will be the AMRP and the appropriate position description for the role and Position Classification Standard for substantive academic level.
Performance will also be reviewed against individual performance and development objectives specified in the previous AMRP.
The performance review will include a discussion on areas in which performance has:
§ been in accordance with position accountabilities and the AMRP objectives
§ exceeded position accountabilities and / or AMRP objectives
and/or;
§ areas in which performance needs to improve, including actions to bring about the performance improvement, and the co-ordination of training and other support requirements.
Academic Managers are encouraged to use feedback from a wide range of sources in presenting evidence about their performance. This may include feedback from colleagues, and staff members whom they are supervising, in addition to objective evidence regarding achievements
At the formal review, it is expected that the parties will have given considerable thought and preparation to the analysis of the performance and development objectives of the individual and what progress has been made toward them.
At the conclusion of the review, the relevant supervisor will complete the AMRP form Part 2 and mark performance as satisfactory/commended; needing improvement or unsatisfactory providing a suitable explanation of the decision in the "Overall Comments" section.
The supervisor will discuss, consider and approve leave for the upcoming twelve months.
3.5 Finalisation of Objectives
Performance and development objectives for the next 12 months are to be finalised with the relevant supervisor during November each year for the calendar year and recorded on the form "Academic Manager Plan - Part 3". Corporate goals and outcomes will be incorporated into the AMRPs for Academic Managers. The discussions should take account of the following items:
§ Management accountabilities of the position.
§ University requirements and the University Strategic Plan.
§ Group requirements.
§ Relevant strategic and operational plans.
§ Strategic directions of the academic unit.
§ Individual objectives and development requirements.
§ Other issues which individuals/supervisors determine are of relevance.
Once the requirements have been established they must be stated as objectives. Measures by which performance will be evaluated also need to be discussed between the relevant supervisor and the individual. The measures of performance must be fair, equitable and as objective as possible.
The development objectives include the identification, discussion, and agreement on development of specific skills, training and personal development considered important to enhance current performance and prepare individuals for future advancement in both the academic management and the academic role. Development objectives provide a focus for development over the following 12 months by identifying any skills and development required to achieve the performance objectives in the plan. Specific objectives are to be established between the individual and the relevant supervisor established in discussion.
The individual may wish to undertake professional development activities that are not specifically tied to the performance plan. These are legitimate activities and ought to be included in the discussions on personal development. Once all the opportunities are identified, the parties can agree on the actual activities to be undertaken. These discussions need to take into account the effects on budgets, work allocations and other day-to-day activities. The intention of the AMRP is to provide a specific focus for performance over the period ahead. Performance in meeting objectives in accordance with position accountabilities and the AMRP will provide the basis for determination of increments where they apply.
Once the objectives have been finalised, and documented, copies should be retained for both the relevant supervisor and the individual. The AMRP should be ongoing dialogue to ensure objectives are being achieved and to evaluate progress and any problems encountered. It should be noted that objectives and plans may need to be adjusted from time to time because of changing circumstances and events which are unexpected or out of the control of specific individuals. If such a situation occurs, the Academic Manager needs to present a case to the relevant supervisor and agree any variations to the outcomes or parts of the previously agreed AMRP.
Leave plans will be agreed and the supervisor will ensure that leave arrangements are in accord with the relevant leave provisions and are entered and approved online via the portal.
3.6 Timing
Performance Reviews will be conducted during November of each year for the previous 12 months, normally in association with finalisation of the objectives for the following year.
It is expected that the relevant supervisor will provide regular ongoing performance feedback on specific matters with Academic Managers in the normal course of communication throughout the year. This feedback will be taken into account for the formal review.
The parties should be monitoring the progress of the plans and report specific achievements and issues that may prevent achievement of the plans as they arise.
3.7 Unsatisfactory Performance
Performance management processes are focused upon assisting individuals to achieve University strategic objectives and to support the professional and career development of individuals. Sometimes, for whatever reason, individuals do not meet the required performance. When this situation occurs the University is committed to assisting the individual to achieve the performance required. Support may involve skills and knowledge development and regular coaching and feedback.
Where unsatisfactory performance continues, the University must take appropriate action to ensure that University affairs are managed professionally and productively.
The following procedures will apply in the case of unsatisfactory performance of an Academic Manager. The process is similar to that in the Academic Staff Review.
§ Where unsatisfactory performance is identified the relevant supervisor will identify and document what specific performance is unsatisfactory.
§ The relevant supervisor will determine a developmental plan with the individual to bring performance up to the required level and record it.
§ The supervisor will establish a timeframe, not to exceed six months from the date of the AMRP, to achieve the required levels of performance.
§ At the expiration of the specified period the relevant supervisor will hold a review meeting with the Academic Manager to review performance.
§ If performance is satisfactory no further action will be taken.
§ If performance is still unsatisfactory, the individual will be removed from the academic management role. In this instance, the individual will return to their usual academic role.
Academic Managers should note that there is no appeal process for unsatisfactory performance in the academic management role.
4. DELEGATED AUTHORITIES
The relevant Academic Deputy Vice Chancellor/Pro Vice Chancellor has the authority to assess the performance of the Academic Manager in this process. The Deputy Vice Chancellor (Academic) or Group Pro Vice Chancellor may delegate the authority for this process to the appropriate Dean in the review of Heads of Schools/Heads of Research Centres.
4 / Performance Management of Academic Managers Policy and Procedures[1] Refer Appendix 7, Academic Staff Review Policy and Procedures